MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057213581 · doi:10.4296/cwrj3501079

Closing the South Saskatchewan River Basin to New Water Licences: Effects on Municipal Water Supplies

2010· article· en· W2057213581 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
David Pernitsky, Natalie D. Guy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClosing (real estate)Water supplyGeographyWater resource managementDrainage basinStructural basinEnvironmental protectionBusinessEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringCartographyGeologyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Alberta provincial government approved the Water Management Plan for the South Saskatchewan River Basin (SSRB) in August 2006. As a result of this plan, the Province stopped accepting applications for new allocations of water in the Oldman, Bow, and South Saskatchewan sub-basins in southern Alberta. This licence closure has had a significant effect on water supply strategies available to municipal water users, as many communities currently hold water licences that are not adequate for their projected growth. To meet additional water demands, these communities must reduce their water use, arrange water licence transfers, or purchase water from another licence holder. This paper describes how closing the SSRB to new water allocations has affected water supply planning for municipalities in the Calgary region in southern Alberta. It also discusses water supply and licence constraints and potential mitigation strategies, and examines the effects of the basin closure on water supply and land-use planning, and utility governance.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.166 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriquesSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207